ArticleJornal de pediatria2026
Humanizing pediatric anesthesia care: development and validation of an educational video for caregivers.
Article in Jornal de pediatria, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo develop an educational video on pediatric anesthesia, obtain evidence of content validity from experts, and assess its clarity, adequacy, and acceptability among caregivers.
methodsThis methodological study was conducted at a tertiary pediatric university hospital in Brazil between 2023 and 2025 and comprised sequential qualitative and quantitative phases. The qualitative and development phases included semistructured interviews with 10 caregivers, a narrative literature review, script development, and production of a preliminary video. The validation phases included 22 experts and 12 caregivers, who completed different instruments according to the objectives of each assessment. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha, and content validity was assessed using the Scale-level Content Validity Index using the average method (S-CVI/Ave).
resultsCaregiver interviews identified information needs related to fasting, type of anesthesia, monitoring, and postoperative care. Using the expert instrument, the S-CVI/Ave was 94%, and Cronbach's alpha was 0.94. Using the caregiver instrument, the corresponding values were 98% and 0.75. These findings should be interpreted separately because different instruments were used. Suggestions from both groups were subsequently incorporated into the final video, which was produced in Brazilian Portuguese, lasted 4 min and 40 s, and used 2D animation, illustrations, text, and narration.
conclusionsThe evaluated version achieved satisfactory content validity indices and was considered clear, relevant, and appropriate for caregivers. The revised final version was not reassessed. Clinical effectiveness was not evaluated and should be investigated in future studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.